Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
A good example of how well-meant positive rights turn into hellish nightmares.
They don't derive knowledge. They create it afresh.
RT @PessimistsArc:
1897: Guy asks Washington D.C. for permission to use his new fangled horseless carriage.
Their response? Banning all ho…
@lostintaut @RichardDawkins
Oh cool, wasn't familiar with "protologism."
"Intrameme" could work, but ideally the word would be as simple as "meme." Something single-syllable, maybe rhyming with meme...
@lostintaut @RichardDawkins
One last thing: "inter" means "between" or "across," so "inter" may confuse people into thinking that we're talking about ideas that spread between minds.
"Intra" means "within" which fits better.
So there's a difference in meaning. E.g. intranational != international.
@lostintaut @RichardDawkins
Hmm not bad. Intra maybe better. But a mouthful in any case.
- The Communication of Authority
- The Disambiguation of Hilarity
- The Artificiality of Anxiety
- The Machiavellianism of Uncertainty
- The Latitudinarianism of Diversity
- The Schizosaccharomycetaceae of Disparity
Your algorithm has reach.
@tjaulow @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
Interesting. I've had similar thoughts about humor (though not in terms of rewards).
RT @realchrisrufo:
Seattle is quickly moving forward with its plan to "abolish prisons."
I've received a trove of leaked documents from w…
Yes. I think this tells us something new about meme theory: not only does a meme have to be good at spreading between people and getting its holders to enact certain behaviors, it must first spread within minds as a meon. That's how it causes behavior in the first place.
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
I believe computational universality follows from the laws of physics as a conclusion (see Deutsch's work IIRC), but even if it were purely conjectural, so what? All theories are conjectural (Popper), so that in itself is not a criticism.
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
The abstractions I wrote about are not at all arbitrary. They are deliberately placed in the context of a larger theory that's hard to vary, and their place in it is hard to vary, too.
@Crit_Rat @ChipkinLogan
BTW, are you by chance referring to a specific theory of ideas that replicate within a mind/have you heard of that concept before? I've been trying to find evidence that maybe the neo-Darwinian theory of the mind isn't new.
@Crit_Rat @ChipkinLogan
Ok but sometimes I want to speak only of the former not the latter, so it would be good to disambiguate them.
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
If we understand the mind tomorrow, and build AGI on a computer, that AGI will not have anything to do with brain hardware—nor could it possibly, because it won't run on a brain, nor would the computer it runs on have to imitate the brain in any way because both are univrsl alrdy
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
That our progression in computer science was bottom-up does not refute computational universality or the substrate-independence of software.
And because computation is universal, there is no different kind of computation going on in a mind.
Maybe “meons”...
To be clear, they are already part of the neo-Darwinian evolution that occurs in a mind even if they never become memes. Both meme evolution and meon evolution are neo-Darwinian.
Actually scratch that, “neon” is already a name for a chemical element.
what do you think? As in the “neo” in “neo-Darwinian theory of the mind.”
Title suggestion for David’s next book: “The Beginning of Infinity 2: The Middle of Infinity.”
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
We don’t explain word processors in terms of hardware, do we? Why should we when it comes to the mind?
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
Why? The mind, like all software, is substrate-independent.
If only the word weren’t already taken!
Those are one’s gym-related ideas only. ;)
@lostintaut @RichardDawkins
Looks as though that distinction is already in use:
And I’d rather not have the word “meme” in the word. A rhyme of it would be cool maybe. Or something completely new. twitter.com/micahtredding/…
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
I would just focus on ideas replicating as software, independent of their substrate.
After all, the whole point of AGI research is to run the program on a computer that isn’t the brain.
@fwmm @micahtredding @RichardDawkins
I would ignore the brain entirely and focus on the mind. Yes all information processing is physical but we have figured out how to translate abstractions into physical movements (by building and instructing computers) and the brain is a computer.
@tjaulow @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
Glad you read the article and appreciate the feedback.
@tjaulow @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
There are many “theories of consciousness” along those lines but I’m not particularly impressed with them. Self-referentiality has a woo-woo status somehow. May have to do with recursion being intimidating. Don’t see how that explains anything.
@tjaulow @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
Yes, I’ve had similar thoughts.
Also interesting how we forget most dreams quickly after waking up. Must be short-lived replicators. Adapted to the dream state, overwhelmed in the waking state.
@tjaulow @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
Not sure I understand—mind elaborating on humor? You’re saying there’s an explanation of humor that says the same thing I wrote about consciousness?
I like it but too easy to confuse with memes when heard spoken.
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
Ah. Not sure why you threw linguistics in there but yes, generally speaking, just thinking of an idea may help spread it through the mind.
Judging by my notifications it took you three min to read a fifteen min essay?
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
What do you mean by "simulation" here?
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
Ok but it sounds like those terms mean something else (not to mention that that entire section is mostly false even within memetics).
The neo-Darwinian theory of the mind isn't about memes at all. It'd just be good to have a term to disambiguate the ideas it describes from memes
.@RichardDawkins vs @BretWeinstein: a commentary.
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
Another difference is that memetic evolution is a property of groups of people, whereas mental evolution of ideas is a property of individuals, and would still happen in complete isolation.
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
One difference is that the "inner" replication does not depend on outward displays/behavior which memes depend on. E.g. the meme of waving won't replicate unless people wave to each other. But ideas in a mind can replicate even if you don't enact them.
@micahtredding @RichardDawkins
Not all ideas that spread within a mind spread between minds (but in the inverse they do). Maybe that's what you mean by reach, idk.
Ideas spread within the mind in the sense that they self-replicate.
For context and the role of these ideas in a mind: medium.com/conjecture-mag….
.@RichardDawkins calls ideas that spread between people "memes."
Anyone have any ideas for what to call ideas that spread within a single person's mind? Would be good to have a term to effectively disambiguate them from memes since both are ideas in the general sense.
Out: "largely peaceful protests"
In: "Expecting protests to be peaceful is racist." twitter.com/ConceptualJame…
A reading of my article "The Neo-Darwinian Theory of the Mind":
Another gem from the Medium home page.
At least it seems Medium recommends these articles to me only because I've read similar ones before, so there's some hope not everyone's home page looks this nuts.
Their "Momentum" blog I'd guess is on everyone's home page, though. https://t.co/rsPgWYejil
is doing similar nonsense on the "My Network" page. At the very top (above the "people you may know from ..." section) they now have a "Black voices to follow and amplify" section.
🤮 https://t.co/uHHEcvS6am
My @Medium homepage today.
The meme of addressing "white people" as if they were this homogenous group is spreading well, it seems. At the bottom you can see that Medium is supporting this stuff.
Starting to wonder if I should do a self-hosted blog instead of one on Medium. https://t.co/jtRRTiQV5w
@falibilista @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
Ok let me clarify. I do think people have free will. Having free will = being the author and enactor of one’s choices. I’d be very interested to know if this clashes with the neo-Darwinian theory of the mind somehow because that would be a problem I’d need to solve.
@falibilista @ChipkinLogan @astupple @popper1902 @RichardDawkins @ella_hoeppner
What do you mean by “the reverse transpires”? That the article makes it sound like I don’t think free will exists?
Cancel socialists like this one. twitter.com/RepPressley/st…
I don't think so, but not all of those resisting forced vaccinations are anti-vaxxers. I don't think you were necessarily suggesting that, but I'm saying it for clarity.
@HeuristicAndy
I wrote a comment on your blog but can't submit it. "Comments on this blog are restricted to team members."
My article "The Neo-Darwinian Theory of the Mind" has been published with Conjecture Magazine (ed. @ChipkinLogan and @astupple). Featuring mentions of @popper1902, @RichardDawkins, and @ella_hoeppner.
“It’s okay for politicians to have dictatorial powers because it’s for your own good. You don’t know what’s best for you. I do. You are a liability to yourselves, and need to be saved from yourselves. Know that I punish you only because I love you.” twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/sta…
RT @popper1902:
"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again."
It’s impossible to discern a truth or assign likelihoods to theories because there is no criterion of truth or closeness to truth.
All we can do is correct errors. We tentatively adopt theories until we find errors with them.
See Popper’s “Conjectures and Refutations.”
Hmm... how about half an hour of programming. And you?
@HeuristicAndy
We can only hope?! I was painting this as a nightmare scenario.
Some truth in that. Better: an open mind knows it’s fallible and seeks the truth by correcting errors.
There is no likelihood to truth. Truth is true. Explanations are either true or false.
Prediction: people will be forced to get the Corona vaccine, punishable by law. Those resisting will be branded as “grandma killers.” No mention of coercion, only outcomes.
Either CA or NY will be first state to implement this.
While the former is possible and the latter isn’t, the former refers to a process that happens after a conjecture has been created. Once created, we may deduce claims from a conjecture. But there is no process of inference that creates conjectures. That requires evolution.
Grammarly offers "inference" as a synonym for "conjecture." 😱
Rediscovered this classic and hilarious satiric piece: youtube.com/watch?v=dOOQ1Z…
.@nytimes you left a breakpoint somewhere in your JS on your website nytimes.com.
@HeuristicAndy @krlwlzn @ChipkinLogan @olliewaters
I sympathize btw that portraying it as a "career change" trivializes WW's issues. Notwithstanding, WW would not have had to point guns had the government not pointed theirs first, and he could have made his decisions safely, openly, legally.
@HeuristicAndy @krlwlzn @ChipkinLogan @olliewaters
As you know, CRists don't want a utopia. Nor is healthcare in Denmark free. Somebody pays for it at government gunpoint.
WW is (correctly) condemned for violent behavior, but the government somehow isn't. Neither of them should point the gun.
@SlaytonBenjamin @ChipkinLogan @olliewaters
This article says he abandoned her because he felt inferior. huffpost.com/entry/vince-gi…
@HeuristicAndy @ChipkinLogan @olliewaters
Not sure I follow. Are you saying teachers in Denmark are not as poor as Walter White?
Just had a great conversation with @ChipkinLogan and @olliewaters. Before Oliver joined, I remarked to Logan how Breaking Bad is a tragedy about government criminalizing drug use. In a voluntarist society, Walter White could have changed careers peacefully.
Last chance to pre-order my ebook/audio track "A Conversation with William Paley" at 50% off before it goes live tomorrow!
I am confident you will learn more about the mind from this 1hr conversation than from any machine-learning or AI course. :)
Calling it “reverse” is itself misleading. Judging someone by the color of their skin is universally bad in every direction.
A brief mention that creativity = ability to solve problems, then mostly induction and mistaking inborn knowledge for intelligence. No mention of Popper.
I enjoy Kurzgesagt's videos but this one is rather schlechtgesagt. As if Popper had never lived :(
Yes any complex ability that wasn't predicted and is way off the mark for any traditional program behavior would be a good indication.
Resisting to being meddled with is another good indicator (but all good replicators will do this by definition, so doesn't mean its AGI)
Because the leaked knowledge can be (need not be) dogmatic and result in preclusion of knowledge creation, thereby forcing the program down a certain path, at which point the program can't be creative anymore.
Oh, I wasn't coming from an "ableism" perspective and didn't mean it as a snarky remark. I appreciate your work, sir.
Yup that. Also recall BoI chapter 7 that the programmer is in no position to judge whether the program created knowledge or if its just iterating on the programmer's knowledge.
More leaked knowledge = more rigid program. It may not create any knowledge (worse: look like it does)
Oof this one could use a better color contrast.
Nice shot! Great visibility of Saturn and Jupiter with the naked eye these past couple of weeks, too.
If that's at all possible, it would be a good way to avoid leaking knowledge into the program. I have a hunch it's the early decisions in these types of programs that make or break genuine evolution of knowledge.
Ok. I wonder if there's a way the arrangement of particles could itself become code that influences further replication (like in RNA-World Hypothesis). If so, that code should automatically be subject to variation and selection without any additional programming effort.